Sorry, but I think a Critique Genre is just as bad, if not worse, than the icon next to the thumbnail. It's actually worse because now you limit the artist to having to put the picture in that specific genre if they want comments and not the one it was meant for. It also has the same problems as I mentioned earlier with people being sent to a specific genre, when their art is deemed as needing critique by some critic.

I still agree with Tuttle's 12x12 logo in the comment box and let the art be in the genre it was designed to go with...

To Draculaz,
I'm sorry, but blah, blah, blah. The end product is what viewers see and what art is judged on. Who's to say that three primitives is not art? You?? Are you that vain as to make that determination? Two different color lines on a canvas is not art IMO, but yet it sold for $25,000 at a gallery. So...How much time you spend, though I admire those that model their own work and for others, is not really considered by most viewers, as much as whether the art speaks to them. I've seen lots of incredibly well done and modeled scenes, but I don't remember most of them because they didn't say anything to me, but yet I still remember the upside down bear who was abandoned by a child. That used other people's models, but it spoke to me, and it touched my heart. That is what art is about, not what you did to get there. Is it unfair? Probably, but that's life...